[Dr David Thork]

You are aware that there are diseases that don't affect humans, right?

Yes. Why would we bring that into a conversation about saving human lives? It is a ridiculous strawman. And you'll be stunned to learn that I am not a veterinary historian. And literally no one on this website had heard of rinderpest. And Iceman only found it after a google to say "ah haaa!" having been unaware that we haven't eradicated many diseases as he suggested. His argument is in shreds. Mine still stands. Our record of erradicating diseases is actually extremely poor. There is only one disease that you might have got, that is now eradicated. We are moving on. This strawman deserves no further discussion.

Thork: you do know that Corona is a type of SARS virus, one which has been studied for decades?
Remember swine flu?  Bird flu?  Thats the same family as Covid19.

So the vaccine thats been developed was made based on the nearly 2 decades worth of reasearch into that family of viruses.

I'd guess there are at least a clear 30 points between our respective IQs and you are the one in deficit. If you want to patronise me, you'll get the same back. I'm also aware of MERS which you get from camels. So what if they have been studied for decades? They are different diseases. Just because we can effectively treat some types of cancer doesn't mean we can treat others. Just because we have vaccines for some coronaviruses doesn't mean you can use their vaccines on this disease. You can't. You need a new vaccine. And in this case, a new and unlicensed one where the scientists themselves are unable to answer very basic questions such as ... do I need regular annual boosters? Do I need it, if I have had real coronavirus or am I already immune? Am I still contagious if I have been vaccinated?

If they can't answer those questions, I'm not so sure they can't answer questions like ... will the vaccine hit my sperm count? Can the vaccine give me autoimmune problems? Will this vaccine give me a brain tumour? Will the vaccine turn me into a homosexual 5 years after taking it?

[Lord Dave]

You are aware that there are diseases that don't affect humans, right?

Yes. Why would we bring that into a conversation about saving human lives? It is a ridiculous strawman. And you'll be stunned to learn that I am not a veterinary historian. And literally no one on this website had heard of rinderpest. And Iceman only found it after a google to say "ah haaa!" having been unaware that we haven't eradicated many diseases as he suggested. His argument is in shreds. Mine still stands. Our record of erradicating diseases is actually extremely poor. There is only one disease that you might have got, that is now eradicated. We are moving on. This strawman deserves no further discussion.

Thork: you do know that Corona is a type of SARS virus, one which has been studied for decades?
Remember swine flu?  Bird flu?  Thats the same family as Covid19.

So the vaccine thats been developed was made based on the nearly 2 decades worth of reasearch into that family of viruses.

I'd guess there are at least a clear 30 points between our respective IQs and you are the one in deficit. If you want to patronise me, you'll get the same back. I'm also aware of MERS which you get from camels. So what if they have been studied for decades? They are different diseases. Just because we can effectively treat some types of cancer doesn't mean we can treat others. Just because we have vaccines for some coronaviruses doesn't mean you can use their vaccines on this disease. You can't. You need a new vaccine. And in this case, a new and unlicensed one where the scientists themselves are unable to answer very basic questions such as ... do I need regular annual boosters? Do I need it, if I have had real coronavirus or am I already immune? Am I still contagious if I have been vaccinated?

How the disease reacts with a vaccine in the public and if the vaccine is safe are two different things. 

If they can't answer those questions, I'm not so sure they can't answer questions like ... will the vaccine hit my sperm count? Can the vaccine give me autoimmune problems? Will this vaccine give me a brain tumour? Will the vaccine turn me into a homosexual 5 years after taking it?

Its different, yes, but not so much as to require a completely different approach.  Some things are answered with time and how much it mutates.  Also, humans are all different so for starters...

1. Can't hit your sperm count if its already 0.
2. Only if your immune system is fucked up already.
3. No.
4. No.

The first two can probably happen if you have the right conditions in your body.  Good luck figuring out that combination.  The second do are you just being a dick, so they're no to everyone.

But everyone's body is different.  They can answer it generally (and some of them are answered) but sometimes people have abnormal reactions. 

[Dr David Thork]

How about you find me a medical citation saying this vaccine won't turn me gay? Because if it does, I won't be able to sue the pharma company as they have been given immunity from prosecution.

I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand. If a pharma company will not stand behind its own products with its wallet ... I'm not risking my health on those same products. The instant Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Janssen et al accept liability for their products ... I'll know they are safe to take. Not a moment before and not because you wrote 1) No, 2) No 3) No 4) No. You aren't going to pick up my medical/care costs if I get hurt either. 

[Lord Dave]

How about you find me a medical citation saying this vaccine won't turn me gay? Because if it does, I won't be able to sue the pharma company as they have been given immunity from prosecution.

I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand. If a pharma company will not stand behind its own products with its wallet ... I'm not risking my health on those same products. The instant Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Janssen et al accept liability for their products ... I'll know they are safe to take. Not a moment before and not because you wrote 1) No, 2) No 3) No 4) No. You aren't going to pick up my medical/care costs if I get hurt either.

1. The NHS will.
2. Pretty sure if they did without a ton of asterixes, they'd be sued to bankrupcy because America is full of dicks.  But thats fine.  Thats your criteria and I respect it. 

[Rama Set]

Thork: you do know that Corona is a type of SARS virus, one which has been studied for decades?
Remember swine flu?  Bird flu?  Thats the same family as Covid19.

So the vaccine thats been developed was made based on the nearly 2 decades worth of reasearch into that family of viruses.

I'd guess there are at least a clear 30 points between our respective IQs and you are the one in deficit. If you want to patronise me, you'll get the same back. I'm also aware of MERS which you get from camels. So what if they have been studied for decades? They are different diseases. Just because we can effectively treat some types of cancer doesn't mean we can treat others. Just because we have vaccines for some coronaviruses doesn't mean you can use their vaccines on this disease. You can't. You need a new vaccine. And in this case, a new and unlicensed one where the scientists themselves are unable to answer very basic questions such as ... do I need regular annual boosters? Do I need it, if I have had real coronavirus or am I already immune? Am I still contagious if I have been vaccinated?

A lot of that data will become very clear soon. As for your last question no vaccine prevents you from carrying a viral load, it reduces the time between introduction of the virus and immune response and the effectiveness of the immune response.

If they can't answer those questions, I'm not so sure they can't answer questions like ... will the vaccine hit my sperm count? Can the vaccine give me autoimmune problems? Will this vaccine give me a brain tumour? Will the vaccine turn me into a homosexual 5 years after taking it?

The vaccine is largely based on previous vaccines and they are extremely confident that there aren’t long term side effects. Maybe you should research that so you can put your mind at rest.

[JSS]

And literally no one on this website had heard of rinderpest.

Here you go being wrong again. That's twice in a row now.

[Iceman]

I said eradicated when I should have said "made completely irrelevant for billions of people" as Rama pointed out. You said literally one disease had been officially eradicated, when the actual number is two.

Now you're complaining that no one is going to pay you is something goes wrong even though Dave told you that national health programs have all already stepped up to back to vaccine and provide benefits.

[jack44556677]

Which 2?

I heard smallpox was back on the market...

[JSS]

Which 2?

I heard smallpox was back on the market...

Source? Are you talking about the theoretical reoccurrence due to the tundra melting?

If it did come back, would you get the vaccine?

[Dr David Thork]

1. The NHS will.

The NHS will what? If I get a life changing side effect from one of these vaccines, I should be able to sue that company for £millions to ensure my care costs are covered forever due to their negligence. So that I can have disabled ramps put in my home, a 24 hour a day carer, shower and toilet adaptations, a guide dog if I need it, a transit van with a wheel chair lift, a bed with a hoist ... you know shit you need if you get seriously hurt. All the NHS will do is put me to the back of a 10 month queue to see a doctor who will prescribe me something for the pain. It is not the same thing at all.

The vaccine is largely based on previous vaccines and they are extremely confident that there aren’t long term side effects.

Not confident enough to put their share price on the line should they need to compensate people for any damage caused. They can say anything they like. That they swear on their mother's grave, that they promise their firstborn, they can swear on the holy bible ... until they back their products with their money and accept liability for them, I'm not taking them. I think only an idiot would, unless you were extremely vulnerable, which I am not. 

If it did come back, would you get the vaccine?

Fuck yeah. I'd trample a bingo hall full of an old ladies to get it. Smallpox is a dreadful disease. It leaves permanent scarring, can cause blindness ... and that's if you are lucky enough not to die from it. Smallpox (aka red plague) ravaged ancient Rome. Huge death tolls. But the difference is
1) smallpox is dangerous to me where coronavirus isn't
2) smallpox vaccine is licensed and manufacturers accept liability for those drugs.

[JSS]

If it did come back, would you get the vaccine?

Fuck yeah. I'd trample a bingo hall full of an old ladies to get it. Smallpox is a dreadful disease. It leaves permanent scarring, can cause blindness ... and that's if you are lucky enough not to die from it. Smallpox (aka red plague) ravaged ancient Rome. Huge death tolls. But the difference is
1) smallpox is dangerous to me where coronavirus isn't
2) smallpox vaccine is licensed and manufacturers accept liability for those drugs.

You could still die from COVID, and it's still looking likely you could suffer permanent damage even without symptoms. Coincidentally enough, heart and lung scarring has been found. We know nerve damage is also happening.

COVID would have milled massive numbers of people if it happened back in Rome too. The only reason it's as controlled as it is, is because of modern medicine and at least SOME people using masks and social distancing.

So you won't take the COVID vaccine because you won't get ENOUGH money in the unlikely event it somehow makes you sick, and would rather risk getting COVID which has a actual chance of killing you plus damaging your heart or lungs in which case you won't get any money.

Humans are terrible at risk assessment, I submit you as exhibit A.

[Lord Dave]

1. The NHS will.

The NHS will what? If I get a life changing side effect from one of these vaccines, I should be able to sue that company for £millions to ensure my care costs are covered forever due to their negligence. So that I can have disabled ramps put in my home, a 24 hour a day carer, shower and toilet adaptations, a guide dog if I need it, a transit van with a wheel chair lift, a bed with a hoist ... you know shit you need if you get seriously hurt. All the NHS will do is put me to the back of a 10 month queue to see a doctor who will prescribe me something for the pain. It is not the same thing at all.

Do you really think the drug manufacturer is gonna settle your suit?  Most likely you'll be offered some small sum of money and told to take it or be out lawyered.  This ain't their first rodeo.

[AATW]

You don’t think people like you, Total Lackey and AATW complaining about the oh so massive infringement on their rights has something to do with it?

I can’t think of another example where it has been mandated that a person take a certain medicine or vaccine outside of the more authoritarian regimes.

One could argue that there is a moral imperative that should compel people to take it, but making laws to mandate it - or making rules which means life basically becomes impossible for those who decline to take it - seems to be crossing a line.

You could argue that it’s a line which should be crossed but remember we are talking about a disease which has a relatively low fatality rate. It’s about 1% across the population of a developed country although that becomes higher the older people get.

[Dr David Thork]

Do you really think the drug manufacturer is gonna settle your suit?  Most likely you'll be offered some small sum of money and told to take it or be out lawyered.  This ain't their first rodeo.

class action. They'd settle as fast as possible before more people joined and would try to keep publicity to a minimum.

Humans are terrible at risk assessment, I submit you as exhibit A.

Using the following tool (feel free, have a go yourself) I have a 1:83333 chance of dying from covid. A 1:4405 chance if I end up in hospital.
https://www.qcovid.org/Home/AcademicLicence?licencedUrl=%2FPatientInformation%2FPatientInformation

The algorithm doesn't take into account things like how much exercise I do (quite a lot), how sickly I am in general (I'm not), and how bad my mother's cooking was when I was a child giving me a cast iron immune system from all the times she food poisoned me. Also this uni will want to over inflate the odds rather than play them down. My risk is probably more like a lottery win than the numbers they have given me. I'm in no danger at all.

How's your risk?

[Rama Set]

You don’t think people like you, Total Lackey and AATW complaining about the oh so massive infringement on their rights has something to do with it?

I can’t think of another example where it has been mandated that a person take a certain medicine or vaccine outside of the more authoritarian regimes.

In Canada you can’t go to public school without getting a suite of vaccines. That kind of mandate seems reasonable.

One could argue that there is a moral imperative that should compel people to take it, but making laws to mandate it - or making rules which means life basically becomes impossible for those who decline to take it - seems to be crossing a line.

You could argue that it’s a line which should be crossed but remember we are talking about a disease which has a relatively low fatality rate. It’s about 1% across the population of a developed country although that becomes higher the older people get.

Let’s also remember it’s an oddly contagious disease and a low fatality rate helps it propagate broadly.

[Lord Dave]

Do you really think the drug manufacturer is gonna settle your suit?  Most likely you'll be offered some small sum of money and told to take it or be out lawyered.  This ain't their first rodeo.

class action. They'd settle as fast as possible before more people joined and would try to keep publicity to a minimum.

The problem is you'd need alot of people with the same issue.  If there are big side effects, its likely to a small group.  Small enough to be covered under the "Well, you're the .01%" in side effects.

Yes they'd settle quick.  They'd offer you some small amount in pounds (maybe a year's salary) and tell you to sign on the dotted line or they'll let you take em to court and see how it goes.



Also: my risk is apparently 1:100,000 of death.
1:4049 of being hospitalized.

[Dr David Thork]

Do you really think the drug manufacturer is gonna settle your suit?  Most likely you'll be offered some small sum of money and told to take it or be out lawyered.  This ain't their first rodeo.

class action. They'd settle as fast as possible before more people joined and would try to keep publicity to a minimum.

The problem is you'd need alot of people with the same issue.  If there are big side effects, its likely to a small group.  Small enough to be covered under the "Well, you're the .01%" in side effects.

Yes they'd settle quick.  They'd offer you some small amount in pounds (maybe a year's salary) and tell you to sign on the dotted line or they'll let you take em to court and see how it goes.



Also: my risk is apparently 1:100,000 of death.
1:4049 of being hospitalized.

Dave, a quick google would tell you that you are talking nonsense. I'm tired of responding to things you just make up.
These three ladies got $800,000 each. Not maybe a years' salary and they are a small group.

[stack]

Do you really think the drug manufacturer is gonna settle your suit?  Most likely you'll be offered some small sum of money and told to take it or be out lawyered.  This ain't their first rodeo.

class action. They'd settle as fast as possible before more people joined and would try to keep publicity to a minimum.

The problem is you'd need alot of people with the same issue.  If there are big side effects, its likely to a small group.  Small enough to be covered under the "Well, you're the .01%" in side effects.

Yes they'd settle quick.  They'd offer you some small amount in pounds (maybe a year's salary) and tell you to sign on the dotted line or they'll let you take em to court and see how it goes.



Also: my risk is apparently 1:100,000 of death.
1:4049 of being hospitalized.

Dave, a quick google would tell you that you are talking nonsense. I'm tired of responding to things you just make up.
These three ladies got $800,000 each. Not maybe a years' salary and they are a small group.

This particular case was part of a 1300+ person class action suit. Of which, it's part of $8 Billion worth of class action lawsuits against J&J and other manufacturers of this product. I'm not sure how this is even relevant to the discussion.

[Lord Dave]

Do you really think the drug manufacturer is gonna settle your suit?  Most likely you'll be offered some small sum of money and told to take it or be out lawyered.  This ain't their first rodeo.

class action. They'd settle as fast as possible before more people joined and would try to keep publicity to a minimum.

The problem is you'd need alot of people with the same issue.  If there are big side effects, its likely to a small group.  Small enough to be covered under the "Well, you're the .01%" in side effects.

Yes they'd settle quick.  They'd offer you some small amount in pounds (maybe a year's salary) and tell you to sign on the dotted line or they'll let you take em to court and see how it goes.



Also: my risk is apparently 1:100,000 of death.
1:4049 of being hospitalized.

Dave, a quick google would tell you that you are talking nonsense. I'm tired of responding to things you just make up.
These three ladies got $800,000 each. Not maybe a years' salary and they are a small group.

I'm pulling it from coloquial info.


But fine.  Big payouts.  So why are you so afraid of no labels?  If they don't say it'll make you gay, and it does, its worse for them than if they say "warning, may cause homosexuality."

[JSS]

Humans are terrible at risk assessment, I submit you as exhibit A.

Using the following tool (feel free, have a go yourself) I have a 1:83333 chance of dying from covid. A 1:4405 chance if I end up in hospital.
https://www.qcovid.org/Home/AcademicLicence?licencedUrl=%2FPatientInformation%2FPatientInformation

The algorithm doesn't take into account things like how much exercise I do (quite a lot), how sickly I am in general (I'm not), and how bad my mother's cooking was when I was a child giving me a cast iron immune system from all the times she food poisoned me. Also this uni will want to over inflate the odds rather than play them down. My risk is probably more like a lottery win than the numbers they have given me. I'm in no danger at all.

How's your risk?

The only reason that first number is so low is because everyone ELSE is protecting you by getting the vaccine.  If everyone caught it, there would be a lot more deaths.

So you having a low, but not even close to zero chance of catching it means you think it's fine to be selfish and spread it to other people who will die from it?

Tell me, what's the risk of dying from the vaccine?  Zero so far, right?  So far I have not seen any reports of a confirmed fatality from the vaccine.  So that 1 in 4405 chance looks a lot bigger now, doesn't it?

And you are still deciding to put other peopel at high risk of death because you don't think you will get enough money if you need to sue them? How selfish can you get?